“We commend the bi-partisan majority in the Minnesota House of Representatives that voted Saturday night to put an amendment on the ballot preserving marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The House joins a bi-partisan majority in the state Senate, and the amendment will now go before voters in November 2012. NOM looks forward to supporting the campaign and lending our expertise and resources to those of allies in the state. We will have a thorough, respectful, discussion with the voters of Minnesota on all the reasons why the definition of marriage should be preserved as the union of a man and a woman, and to explain the risks to Minnesotans if they allow an activist judge or liberal legislators to redefine marriage in the future without public approval.
The key is to read these statements and pay attention to what they are actually saying.
Of course we know that when NOM talks about "lending its expertise and resources," this most likely means blanketing the state with lying flyers, brochures, and commercials falsely accusing the lgbt community of "recruiting children" through gay marriage. Meanwhile NOM talking heads like Maggie Gallagher will go on local talk shows and claim sweetness and light while she espouses that NOM "only wants to protect marriage."
All while all of this is happening, "ordinary citizens" on their own volition (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) will point out erroneous incidents in which they claim that Minnesota's lgbt community are acting like bullies via columns, letters, to the editors, and statements which NOM will publish on its blog (making sure to edit out statements which will call attention to the falsity of these charges.)
Of course his statement, Brown omitted NOM's partner in this venture, the Minnesota Family Council.
So I guess that means we won't be hearing any disavowment from NOM regarding the Minnesota Family Council's hateful belief that gays engage in bestiality and pedophilia when we are not consuming urine and feces.
So much for Brown's claim of having a respectful discussion.
3 comments:
That "bipartisan majority" in the Senate was made possible by ONE DFL senator voting with the Republican majority.
Not the most egregious of their overstatements or flat-out falsehoods, of course, but it's worth noting.
NOM, and all of these front groups, like the Family Resources and Family Associations state and federal, are also backed by a range of groups currently listed by the Southern Poverty Leadership Council on their internationally respected lists as "Hate Groups".
Those lists are only meant to warn well-meaning people away from proven-to-be-malicious groups. The groups still exist.
Oh yeah, a few more enablers of institutionalized orientation bias who will always be allowed to be institutionally biased against citizens who are perceived or actual non-heterosexuals: Mormons. Catholics. Muslims. Jews. Christians. Any other "religion".
Yes, it's sooooo tempting to end with some of my creative, nasty cursing, tailored specifically for NOM and its enablers.
I'll go with wrong again, losers.
@ Jess - there were actually 2 DFLs that voted YES for the bill.
Denise Dittrich from Champlin who also voted YES for VoterID - I keep wondering why she runs as DFL. Though her district is evolving to be more conservative, perhaps she is setting herself up to switch parties soon.
The second DFL was Lyle Koenen of district 20B. I'm wondering can the DFL caucus unendorse these people?
Post a Comment